Northern Ireland Assembly, 18 November 2013

345 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

Matter of the Day

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mr Gregory Campbell has been given leave to make a statement on the violent events in Northern Ireland over the weekend, which fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. Mr Hussey and Mr Lyttle also submitted requests, and I intend to call them immediately after Mr Campbell has spoken. If other Members wish to be called, they should rise continually in their place. All Members will have up to three minutes to speak on the subject, and I remind Members that no points of order or other business may be raised while we deal with this issue.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

As you said, Mr Speaker, we made an application because of the very serious nature of the problems that emerged over the weekend. I propose to be quite brief because there were a number of incidents that, I am sure, caused widespread concern across the community.

In Coleraine, at 5.00 this morning, a young boy of 15 years of age was shot in both legs by masked men.

On Saturday evening in Strabane, a police patrol was the target of a pipe bomb attack in the town. The area commander, Andy Lemon, said:

"Had this device exploded, it could have killed or maimed anyone close by."

In east Belfast, at about 10.45 on Saturday evening, there was a petrol bomb attack on Alliance Party offices. One petrol bomb ignited on the street and was put out by a passing police patrol.

In north Belfast, on Saturday morning, a number of windows of properties in the Ardoyne area were the subject of attack by people believed to belong to Óglaigh na hÉireann.

Earlier on Saturday, there was security alert that caused people to have to leave their homes as a result of a suspicious object in the area.

The combination of those events makes it very clear to us all that there are those across the community, whether loyalist, republican or not affiliated in such a way, who want to try to drive us back to the past. The community has to be absolutely clear, not just in its unity of opposition to such attacks, which, of course, we will demonstrate today, but it must take that unity further and ensure that the people who carried out those attacks cannot do so again. They must be apprehended by the police, brought before the courts, convicted and put in prison. That is the only way that they will be unable to carry out those activities again.

In some of those incidents, there were allegations of antisocial behaviour. Whether it is the police, social services or us as public representatives, we have to be absolutely clear that the system works when dealing with allegations of antisocial behaviour, so that those who try to carry out such activities are ostracised by the community, rather than some in the community welcoming those attacks. Hopefully, there will be no such welcome. We will abhor and rightly condemn the attacks and ensure that those responsible are brought before the courts.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for bringing the Matter of the Day to the House. One thing that all the attacks have in common is that they were committed by cowards. They were committed by people who are not prepared to stand for election or to stand up to argue with you face to face. These attacks were done in the shadows.

The attack on the Alliance Party office in east Belfast was reprehensible. At least the two MLAs and the Member of Parliament from the Alliance Party have stood before the electorate and have been elected to represent the people. The people who fire-bombed the office were not elected to do anything.

In east Londonderry, a young boy of 15 years of age was attacked in his home. What sort of hero are you to do something like that? It was not right in the past and it is not right now. That was an act of cowardice.

In my consistency of West Tyrone, an attempt was made to kill police officers in Strabane by throwing a pipe bomb at a police car. Had that bomb exploded, we would be talking about the deaths or serious injury of police officers. Not only that, a member of the public removed the pipe bomb and put it on safe ground. That person has to be commended for his actions. He at least was thinking of his neighbours. The rogue who came into Strabane with that bomb did not give a hoot for the people of Strabane. He did not care whether that bomb bounced back into the street and was picked up by a child. It was an attempt to murder and to terrorise. All those events have one thing in common; they were attempts to terrorise.

Everyone in the House will condemn all those actions. I agree with Mr Campbell that every step should be taken to have those people apprehended. They should be behind bars and nobody should support their actions in any way, shape or form. Whether it is for loyalism or republicanism, those actions were wrong. I totally condemn those actions on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party, and I hope that the police have those reprobates behind bars very soon.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I am grateful for the opportunity to add the condemnation of the Alliance Party to the serious, cowardly and reckless violence we saw in Northern Ireland at the weekend. There was an attempted murder in Strabane of PSNI officers, who have support from across the community. A child was shot in Coleraine, and our thoughts and prayers are with that boy and his family regardless of the circumstances. The paramilitary-style vigilantism that we saw in north Down and north Belfast is completely unacceptable and has to be rejected by every right-thinking member of our community.

We also saw the latest in a line of attacks in a targeted campaign on the office in east Belfast that is shared by the democratically elected representatives Judith Cochrane MLA, Naomi Long MP and me.

I thank and commend the PSNI for its response to that incident.

Every Member of the House needs to reflect very carefully on the language that they use in demonstrating their support for the PSNI and the rule of law in Northern Ireland. We have to be very clear and unequivocal in our condemnation of all these attacks. Although PSNI officers place their life on the line in service to this community in response to such attacks, the language and actions of some elected representatives in our community have, in my opinion, fallen short of what is required from them in supporting the PSNI, the rule of law and democracy.

I also say to anyone who is harbouring individuals connected to any of these incidents to realise that, until the people who are involved in or behind the attacks are taken off our streets, any member of any family in our community could fall victim to them. We must never accept or grow indifferent to this type of behaviour. We have to work with the PSNI, and the PSNI must do all that it can to take these people off our streets.

The chair of the Police Federation has questioned the validity of the UVF ceasefire, and my colleague Naomi Long MP has called for serious consideration to be given to the reinstatement of the Independent Monitoring Commission (IMC). It is an issue of serious concern that the Secretary of State needs to give urgent attention.

In closing, I will say one other thing. On the same day that the political office that I share with Judith Cochrane MLA and Naomi Long MP was attacked, I heard the Alliance Party be accused of being part of tribal furniture in Northern Ireland. Let me make this very clear: the Alliance Party was founded to stand against sectarianism, division and violence and for a shared society, democracy and the rule of law, and it will take much more than political or physical attacks to stop us from doing so.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I ask Members to rise continually in their place if they want to make a contribution.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. On behalf of Sinn Féin, I, too, condemn the events of the weekend. One of the events happened in my constituency of West Tyrone, in which there was a pipe bomb attack on the PSNI. There was also the mutilation of a 15-year-old in Coleraine and an attack on the Alliance Party offices. There are also ongoing protests that are drawing PSNI resources away from other duties.

I am very disappointed by what happened over the weekend. It is very important that the community know that there is absolutely no support for this type of activity in the community. The people involved are not presenting any alternatives. People want to live in peace and move on, and the people who are carrying out these attacks have absolutely nothing to offer the people of this country.

I reiterate my party's absolute condemnation of what went on over the weekend. It was totally unacceptable, and we join other parties in making that very clear by sending a loud voice from the Chamber.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I remind Members that they have three minutes in which to speak. Members know that I am very reluctant to interrupt them on such a sensitive issue.

We have come to use new words — well, they are not that new — in our vocabulary that should be got rid of. Words such as "paramilitary" and "punishment-style shooting" are no part of a normal democratic society. This Assembly is the democratically elected body.

The PSNI is the Police Service of Northern Ireland, which is doing its best to help us, as politicians, to build a new society that does not have terms such as "paramilitary" or "punishment-style shootings". We have a Public Prosecution Service, and we even have a Minister of Justice. However, we still have brigadiers and OCs 15 years after the signing of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. That is not on.

However, I want to be positive and constructive. The wider community has an important role to play in this. People might not understand that this morning at the Lodge Road police station, police officers are building a jigsaw. Some individual might have the vital piece that completes the picture. I appeal to people. It was somebody else's child this morning. We do not know whose child it might be the next time the men with hoods and balaclavas call at the door.

I have confidence that the foundations are solid enough to withstand the recent incidents. However, people need to be aware that, although it might be somebody else's problem this time, next time it could easily be their problem. Therein lies the key: everyone needs to be part of the picture.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I welcome Mr Campbell's initiative in bringing this matter to the Chamber. I will start by condemning all violence, including that which is supposedly politically motivated. All violence is wrong. To make it absolutely clear, the PSNI is the force of law and order, and it is the PSNI that we owe our allegiance to inside and outside the Chamber.

There were two major incidents in east Belfast at the weekend. One was a hoax bomb in Dundonald. Those who were subjected to it were unaware at the time that it was a hoax. The fear, anguish and inconvenience that they and all who live around that area suffered was very strong indeed. We also owe a debt of gratitude to those whom we refer to as the bomb squad, who risk their lives in going to deal with these matters, not knowing whether it is a hoax or real.

The other major incident, which was the attack on the political offices, was a despicable incident that was carried out by someone already referred to as having "nothing to offer" this community.

On Saturday morning, a young man appeared in court for a previous incident. This question remains: what or who motivated that young man to carry out that incident? He is a young man who is disabled and in employment and who, according to the press, cannot come near Belfast and has to live in Lurgan. What or who motivated him to do that?

I have no doubt that the person who carried out this latest attack will be caught by the PSNI and taken before the courts and will probably face a custodial sentence. What is happening? What and who in our society is encouraging this type of action?

Gregory Campbell secured this Matter of the Day, and he, probably more than most in the Chamber, knows the effect of political violence. He suffered from it. Other DUP Members suffered from it. Not so long ago, we were in the Chamber debating the attacks on Sammy Brush. The homes of our councillors and MLAs have been attacked, and we understand and have seen the effects of those who have attacked the DUP, or any other political party, whatever their motivation.

Joe Byrne (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I condemn all the acts of violence that have happened over recent weeks. In particular, I refer to the pipe bomb incident in Strabane that Mr Hussey referred to. In Strabane, over the past 10 years, excellent relations have grown between the police and the community. The pipe bomb attack is a serious setback to the confidence that people have in policing in Strabane. I utterly condemn it, and I hope that the police are successful in apprehending those responsible. A pipe bomb is a deadly device, and, thank heavens, no police officer or member of the public was killed. I commend the member of the public who removed the pipe bomb from the road and threw it into a waste site, but it is a sign that there are some dangers out there, and we cannot be complacent.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

The attack on the Alliance Party offices or an attack on any political party is an attack on democracy. I absolutely and completely condemn it, and I stand with that party on that matter. An attack on a police officer is also an attack on democracy, and I stand with the PSNI full square, without any equivocation whatsoever, and I urge all Members, when considering matters to do with the police, to support them at all times.

When we then get the situation where vigilantes think that they can take the law into their own hands and attack young people, that is also an attack on democracy. A Member who spoke earlier asked what motivates those people to go and do such things. I do not know what motivates them, but I say to Members here present that it is our job and our responsibility to make democracy work, and the language that we use should send out a very clear message to all the people of Northern Ireland that there is no future that is not a democratic future.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The litany of criminality that we saw over the weekend — much of it quite patently paramilitary — was utterly shameful. Whether it was the shooting of the young boy in Coleraine, the pipe bombing in Strabane, the fire bombing of the Alliance Party offices or the issuing of vigilante threats in Bangor, all those are shameful and wrong. They are testament to the ongoing failure of the Belfast Agreement, which was supposed to bring the new dawn of peace and reconciliation, but which, in part, is the very reason why we have this continuous manifestation of criminality. If, as politicians, you support the undermining of the rule of law by the early release of prisoners — and many in this House did — and you diminish the status of the rule of law, you cannot be entirely surprised that, subsequently, others follow in that mode of diminishing and discrediting the rule of law.

It seems to me that, under the Belfast Agreement, sadly, there has emerged an acceptable level of criminality, lest the process should be disturbed. There are certain players who seem to think and to act as if they are above the law because they are seen to be key to the process. When they flex their muscles, as they do, it is a consequence of having paid the price that we paid in rewarding terrorism and criminality under the Belfast Agreement. So I think that politicians need to be more circumspect before they seek to distance themselves from the fusion of criminality that flows from the fact that, in this Province, we rewarded criminality. We are reaping what we sowed, and, sadly, that is the reality. It was so wrong, then and now.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

It seems to me that, no matter what agreements we put in place in the name of democracy, there will be, as there are now, people who will try to undo them and people who are nothing short of criminals. That is what we are dealing with.

The daily violence news readout seems as normal as the weather forecast or the sports results but it is not normal. Therein lies the problem, because we are being sucked back into what some people once said was an acceptable level of violence. Indeed it is not, and it cannot be, nor can we accept what people suggest to be an acceptable level of violence.

Mr Campbell does well in creating space for our views to be heard, but I believe that we could go further. It seems appropriate that you, Mr Speaker, alongside the First Minister and deputy First Minister, should make clear the widely held views of the Assembly expressed this morning. It seems that that voice and face, representative of the Assembly, needs to be out there, along with us here and the words that are being said today. However, we need to give greater emphasis to our views and to having them heard, and to having their meaning penetrate the people to give them assurances. The people who are lying in their beds, who will go out tonight to do some damage, are not listening to any of us, but the broader audience is important. That is the audience that sent us here. I give thanks to Mr Campbell for giving us this opportunity, but I ask that we, perhaps, take it that bit further.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

All attacks, irrespective of their source, are an attack on democracy. No one, but no one, is above the law. I rise to add my condemnation of all the attacks over the weekend, especially the pipe bomb attack on a police patrol in Strabane in my constituency. There is no doubt that that was a blatant murder attempt on police officers. It is only by the grace of God that we are not mourning the death of a police officer or members of the public in the House this morning.

There is no room in society for this type of behaviour. All that can be done must be done to bring those responsible to justice. That responsibility lies with every elected Member of the House who, if they have any information, must bring it to the police. Likewise, any member of the public who knows something or someone who may have been involved in anything must bring it to the police, because this must be brought to an end. These people must realise that there is no place for them to carry out this type of activity within society. Therefore, we send out our words of condemnation from the House this morning.

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I certainly rise to condemn the violent actions that happened at the weekend in Coleraine, Strabane and east Belfast. I also take the opportunity to condemn the recent shooting in the legs of a man in my constituency in Cullyhanna in County Armagh. I visited the victim a few days ago and heard from him how four men, armed with guns and hammers, burst into the kitchen of his home, hit him in the face with a sledgehammer and shot him in the legs, while his wife and daughter were held in another room.

No statement from any group can justify that barbaric action, and there are no aims, objectives or strategy that can, in any way, justify the use of violence. It was wrong in the past and it is wrong now. Those responsible for that attack are nothing more than the armed wing of criminals whose only interest is moneymaking.

I stand with the victim of that barbaric shooting. The whole community stands with him. My hope is that those responsible will be apprehended by the police and dealt with by the courts.

Speaker's Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Before we return to today's business, I want to address a matter that is causing me and our Deputy Speakers some concern.

On a number of occasions recently, Members have blatantly and persistently ignored directions from the Chair, particularly when it comes to being told that the time for their contribution is up. I have two examples but, in all my time as Speaker, I have never known Members having to be asked on five if not six occasions to bring their remarks to a close.

If Members deliberately go over their time, they need to understand that what is really happening is that they are eating into the time of other Members who wish to make a contribution. Whether I or one of the Deputy Speakers is in the Chair, the authority is the same. I have to say that we have seen a pattern from all parties in the House — no one party is to blame — of Members deliberately going over their speaking time, particularly when they are being told directly that their time is up.

Members, I hope that I do not have to return to this subject. We have watched it for some time and the problem has been on the increase. When an issue is on the increase, I have no choice but to speak to the House and deal with it. I hope that every Member will understand where I, as Speaker, am coming from. Members will know that they get a warning that their time is either almost up or gone. When I see Members rising in their place with a huge bundle of papers, I think to myself that there is no way that that Member will be able to say all that he or she wants to say within five or 10 minutes. I remind the House that time limits are set by the Business Committee. We will leave it there.

Executive Committee Business

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I beg to introduce the Road Races (Amendment) Bill [NIA 29/11-15], which is a Bill to amend the Road Races (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 to provide for contingency days to be specified in an order authorising the use of roads in connection with road races and for the substitution of a contingency day for a day specified in such an order.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That the Occupational and Personal Pension Schemes (Automatic Enrolment) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2013 be approved.

The regulations amend the principal automatic enrolment regulations to, in effect, ban certain consultancy charges in automatic enrolment schemes. As I have said to the House previously, when dealing with pensions I am conscious that it is easy to get lost in a maze of technical provisions and pensions jargon. However, the rule that we are considering is somewhat technical. Although I will try to keep my statements and comments at a fairly high level, some jargon is, unfortunately, inevitable. I will do my best to keep it to a minimum.

The Pensions (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 2008, and corresponding provision in the Westminster Pensions Act 2008, introduced a duty on employers to enrol eligible job holders into a qualifying workplace pension scheme and to make minimum contributions to it. Under the legislation, employers are able to choose the qualifying workplace pension scheme that they adopt to discharge this duty. A qualifying scheme is one that meets specific criteria, for example an occupational pension scheme or a workplace personal pension scheme.

To ensure that scheme members are adequately protected, it was recognised from the outset that administration charges etc should be appropriate and as low as possible. The intention is to protect consumers by tackling high and inappropriate pension charges.

The problem with some consultancy charges is that they may be used for purposes which do not benefit all the scheme members who are required to pay them. Many consultancy charges are characterised by high upfront contribution charges which have the potential to seriously affect an individual's pension savings, particularly if they move jobs frequently, and to undermine confidence in the workplace pension reforms and pensions generally.

The regulations introduce a further condition that any part of a scheme that provides money purchase benefits must meet an automatic enrolment scheme. The scheme must not allow any deductions from contributions, investment returns or the value of the member's rights if they are to be used to fund an agreement between the employer and a third party. In effect, the regulations ban certain consultancy charges in automatic enrolment schemes. That is not meant to impinge on the normal day-to-day running of pension schemes. Trustees etc can continue to pay for important services for the efficient running of schemes.

There is, I believe, broad consensus that a key factor in the success of automatic enrolment will be to ensure that members' contributions etc are not eaten up by inappropriate or costly charges. The regulations are an important step in tackling an emerging problem.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The Minister outlined in some detail the purpose of the regulations. The Committee considered the SL1 pertaining to this legislation at its meeting on 12 September 2013. Subsequently, we looked at the statutory rule at our meeting on 3 October. As the Minister pointed out, the rule came into operation on 14 September. The Committee, after consideration of the regulations and the report from the Examiner of Statutory Rules, agreed to support the recommendation of the regulations from the Minister. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Assembly supports the regulations.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I am pleased with the level of consensus that there is on the regulations. I thank the Chair and members of the Committee for Social Development for the positive way in which they have dealt with them. I therefore commend the motion to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Occupational and Personal Pension Schemes (Automatic Enrolment) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2013 be approved.

Private Members' Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose the motion and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have five minutes.

Alex Attwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes its decision of 9 April 2013 on the recall of the Civic Forum and the lack of progress to date; further notes that there are over 500 submissions to “Haass/O’Sullivan” from civic organisations, victims' groups, individuals and the wider community, and the authority of that input; believes that the Civic Forum can further capture this input, thereby building inclusion and helping to remedy the failures of politics; and calls on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to recall the Civic Forum by the end of January 2014.

Mr Speaker, given your earlier comments about the length of speeches, I want to assure you that I do not intend to read into the record any of these documents, but I will refer to them shortly.

I would be surprised if it was not recognised across all the parties and Benches in the Chamber — then again, the Chamber never fails to surprise me — that one of our greatest strengths in Northern Ireland and Ireland generally is our civic and community organisations, be they sporting, volunteering, charitable, rights based, community based or victims' and survivors' groups. The scale of all that is arguably unlike that of any other part of these islands. It is a measure of the calibre and capacity of people to organise themselves in order to look after their own interests and to seek to look after the interests of others.

In my view, the scale and capacity of the civic world in this part of Ireland was one of the essential elements in ensuring that, during the years of conflict, we did not see civil strife escalate beyond its appalling and traumatic scale. It is my view that conversations by parents and grandparents, between civic leaders and within community organisations held the line, especially at critical points in our history when things could have escalated and deteriorated at the same time. That thought informed the architects of and the signatories to the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, when, in recognition of the scale, capacity and contribution of the civic world, it was proposed that there would be a civic forum.

I am sure that other contributors will touch on the many ways in which civic society can input into our politics and governance, including through the Committees of the Assembly, consultation exercises and a wide range of partnerships. If that is done in the way in which it is meant to be done, it is all worthwhile and healthy. However, it was the view of the House earlier this year when it passed a motion on the matter, and it is the SDLP's view now, that giving enhanced expression and an enhanced role to civic society can help our politics and our place to deal with many of the multiple issues that are all around us and that we need to address urgently.

I have brought these four documents in, Mr Speaker, without reading from them, because, as the panel of parties in the Haass/O'Sullivan process knows, the four volumes were sent to us last Friday by Richard Haass and Meghan O'Sullivan. These are the first four volumes of contributions to the Haass/O'Sullivan talks from outside the talks room. Even these volumes will not capture all those submissions, because these are the ones that third parties and individuals consented to share with the parties.

Any of the panel parties and representatives in the Haass/O'Sullivan talks process cannot but be impressed by the authority, wisdom, ambition and generosity that marks so many of these contributions. They are not only from volunteers, sporting and charitable bodies, rights groups and victims and survivors organisations, but from countless individuals. The fact that, to date, there have been 500 submissions to the Haass/O'Sullivan process demonstrates that there are people outside the talks room in the wider world who have been waiting for this moment to have their say, to comment on the failures and fault lines of politics and to propose remedies. Although it may be disputed by other panel members, it is my view that the wisdom outside the talks room is certainly greater than the wisdom inside it, and we have a lot to learn from that.

How would reconfiguring and recalling the Civic Forum now help us and our society? Here are three ways in which that could be done. The first is to emphasise my point that the wisdom in civic society is arguably greater than that in political society. If we want to shape this society in the image of the right values, with the hopes that have been dashed and the ambition that has been squandered since 1998, the more we need to heed and hear the wider civic world. That includes organisations with which I would have some differences, including the marching orders, on some matters. Unless we try to capture, heed and hear that wisdom, our politics and this place will not prosper and live up to the hope and ambition to which we all seek to aspire.

Secondly, as with the Good Friday Agreement, some of the thinking behind the Civic Forum was to build what was known as the "inclusive society", given that, in our history, people rightly felt that there was the politics of exclusion when it came to this part of the world. Some would argue that the politics of exclusion continue. I might differ from their position on that argument or differ in the scale of what they claim, but there are clearly organisations and people who feel that peace and politics have passed over them in the past number of years. We need to learn from that, and, without indulging bad practice and wrong approaches, we need to try to find ways and means of being more inclusive.

Thirdly, it is my view that if, in or close to the Building, there was a gathering of civic voices in Northern Ireland, that, in itself, would be a guide to the political parties. It would increase our capacity and challenge us to achieve more than we have done. For all the achievements of devolution — there have been great achievements that should never be diminished — such as the new beginning for policing and the united stand against terror, there is the great unfinished business of agreement politics, and there are people who could guide us with their wisdom and authority as we take forward the necessary decisions and politics over the next period. Given that those in the wider civic world are saying to Haass and O'Sullivan that they want to participate in peace and politics moving forward, it falls to us to listen to their voices and include them more and more in how we take peace and politics forward in this part of Ireland.

There are some voices — not very loud, I have to say — who say that this would mean more bureaucracy and more cost. The evidence is that the cost is very low, especially compared with some of the acute costs that fall to the people of Northern Ireland from disputed issues, not least up in Twaddell Avenue. However, the cost of not including is much greater and cannot be measured in pounds or euros. Inclusion has the potential to ensure that the costs of division that we see all around us at the moment do not escalate and embed themselves in the future of this part of the world.

The SDLP's motion is very explicit: it calls for the Civic Forum to be reconvened by "the end of January 2014." In my view, the membership of the Civic Forum should be reconfigured because, as Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness said when the review of the forum commenced in 2008 following restoration, society has moved on since 1998. Therefore, the membership of the forum could be reconfigured to reflect that. I do not dispute that; I agree with that. I have some ideas about how the forum could be reconstructed to make it more representative and enable it to have a bigger and better input into our politics than heretofore. However, the review of its membership should not delay the reconvening of the forum, in order to send out the message that if, on the far side of Haass, we conspire together to build a better future, in doing so, we should recognise the great authority of the civic world —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is almost gone.

Alex Attwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

— and seek to include that more as we go forward.

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

It is almost with a sense of disbelief that I note that the SDLP is playing the same broken record that it plays every so often with regard to the Civic Forum.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

No, the Member will have his opportunity. I cannot seem to grasp its infatuation with the Civic Forum and the need to recall it, given that it had no purpose when it was in place. Even if recalled, it would have no purpose but cost an extortionate amount to run. I do not intend to speak for terribly long on the motion, given that, on three occasions, I have, on this very Floor, said everything that I need to say on the matter. My objection to recalling this ineffective body —

Alban Maginness (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

No, I am quite happy to let the Member have his turn later.

My objection to recalling this ineffective body is clearly documented. To be honest, I do not care if the Civic Forum is never recalled. Let us be honest, it was a product of the Belfast Agreement, which our party opposed and still does. It was operationally ineffective, with not one of its original recommendations accepted or implemented by the Executive of the day. I have no reason to believe that, if recalled, it would change.

When the forum was operational, it was largely composed of the great and the good of society. I refer to the comments made by Lord Kilcooney when he said of the Civic Forum in 'The Irish News' that is was:

"a luxury the people of Northern Ireland cannot afford".

I am sorry, but it cost half a million pounds at that time to fund that unelected and ineffective quango. I prefer to see that amount of money, and it is probably greater now, going into something much more worthwhile, something that would help our constituents.

I welcome the SDLP's comments on the Haass talks, and I am delighted that over 500 submissions have been made to him, albeit different in their nature. I trust that Dr Haass will bring about some creative new thinking and suggestions that can be looked at seriously by the Executive, but sadly, I cannot say the same with confidence about the Civic Forum. Its historical records clearly document that, as a body, it was not expert in this field. Simply, the Civic Forum was not necessary when it was created; it was not heeded when it spoke; and it was not valued enough by some of its members for them to attend. What we will see if it is reintroduced is another talking shop, and that is not what the Northern Ireland people need.

I want to be very clear that I, like other Members, was elected to the House to represent my constituents. To my mind, the public do not want to have another level of bureaucracy, another talking shop. I want to be very clear that I am not against connecting with our communities and I am not against stakeholders feeding into the decision-making of the House to help guide us in what the needs are, but I am against elaborate and expensive structures, which is exactly what the Civic Forum has proved to be. I oppose the motion.

Megan Fearon (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Unlike the previous Member who spoke, I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion. Sinn Féin will support it.

The recall of the Civic Forum would only seek to enhance our decision-making process and promote further inclusion. There is without doubt a growing sense of apathy in our communities, and any step taken to increase engagement must be viewed positively. This is even more apt given the unrest that we have witnessed over the past year. There is clearly a growing number of people who feel frustrated; that is illustrated by at least a dent in community relations in several places.

It would have been an excellent time for politicians to lead from the front on equality issues and on parity of esteem, but clearly we have been let down by some in that regard. I am proud of the steps that my colleagues have taken, particularly in recent times. I think that Máirtín Ó Muilleoir has shown exceptional leadership.

Any recall of the Civic Forum must ensure that it is a truly all-inclusive body, a structured outlet to allow people to have their voices and opinions heard and engaged. It is essential that room be made for the voices of young people, rural communities, women, ethnic minorities, the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered (LGBT) community, the disabled and people from all socioeconomic backgrounds. We need to encourage full participation by all sections of society.

As I have said, there is a growing sense of disillusionment out there, and I fear that it has grown since the last time we debated this issue. The very make-up of this Chamber could be a contributing factor to that opinion, and serious commitments must be made to tackle the gender, age and ethnic profile of the Assembly to ensure that it is truly representative.

I welcome the volume of submissions that have been made to the Haass talks. The more engagement we have from civic society, the more beneficial it will be for all. It demonstrates a need to have an arena where civic society can be involved in tackling the bigger issues. We cannot allow those who have contributed to fall by the wayside.

Recalling the Civic Forum would be useful in tackling some of the more difficult issues that often result in little more than finger-pointing in this Chamber. The forum could be a place for measured debate on important issues and would only be enhanced by the absence of party-politicking. However, we should not limit the discussions to solely political items. There are also wider societal issues that need to be addressed, not least the way in which young people are stereotyped. We need to find ways to address the prevalence of sexism in our society and all that goes with it.

While I support recalling the Civic Forum, I think that we need to have a wider discussion about its terms and its make-up. The Civic Forum is a Good Friday Agreement commitment, so we need to ensure that other commitments are not forgotten. Both the British and Irish Governments have reneged on many of the promises that were made, and it would be remiss of me not to take the opportunity to call for the introduction of a bill of rights.

I welcome the news of President Higgins's upcoming visit to Britain and I hope that it can be a catalyst to fulfil all the commitments made between the Irish and British Governments. Having heard the merits of establishing a Civic Forum today, we should bear in mind the economic climate that we find ourselves in and we should not rush into recalling the old model. We should be exploring how to do things in a more efficient and innovative way.

We support the motion. We feel that it would give a voice to those sections of society that currently feel excluded from the daily business of the Assembly. It would provide for greater transparency, which is something that nobody in the House should fear.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

It seems no time since we had this same debate, and nothing has changed since then. The Civic Forum was the brainchild of the Women's Coalition and achieved very little during its two-year existence. To be fair, it certainly was worth a try, but it cost over half a million pounds, and there was very little to show for that cost.

Paragraph 22 of the St Andrews Agreement states:

"The Northern Ireland Executive would support the establishment of an independent North/South consultative forum appointed by the two Administrations and representative of civil society."

As a result of our experience here with the Civic Forum, it is difficult to see the rationale for continuing with a North/South forum. It would be interesting to know what the situation is with that proposed body and its likely operating costs.

Returning to the Civic Forum, we do not want another unelected, quasi-parliamentary organisation. Our existing Committees already perform a similar function in taking evidence from the public, various bodies and society in general. Much more could be done to develop that system and to improve contact between government and the public.

The Ulster Unionist Party values the views of civic society, and we must continue to engage with it. So far this afternoon, little new information has come to light. We know that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister agreed to a review of the Civic Forum way back in May 2008. However, we are still awaiting a response, and perhaps we might hear something today about the current situation. In the meantime, I oppose the motion.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

On behalf of the Alliance Party, I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the motion and our commitment to participative democracy in Northern Ireland. I expected that most democratic parties in the Assembly would have been able to give that same commitment today, but, then again, some Members never cease to amaze me.

Regarding the motion, Mr Moutray said that the SDLP is playing a broken record. Well, the Assembly previously voted in favour of a similar motion, so it is a bit strange to refer to a motion that has been given the support of the House as a "broken record". Then again, some things never cease to amaze.

Whether Mr Moutray and his party like it or not, the establishment of a Civic Forum is a requirement of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, on which these institutions and this society are founded. It is also an opportunity to enhance the representativeness and effectiveness of our political process.

I agree with Mr Cree that we have seen how certain MLAs, Ministers and Committees can work hard together to engage constituents and organisations in the political process, and the Northern Ireland Assembly and Business Trust (NIABT) and Assembly Community Connect are other means through which to do that. However, I believe that the Civic Forum, or a recalibrated Civic Forum, is one way in which to include the creativity and expertise that we have in civic society in the political process and to encourage enhanced democratic participation in Northern Ireland.

The Alliance Party has consistently supported the inclusion of civic society in the political process. Indeed, Alliance Party leader David Ford wrote to the First and deputy First Minister in January this year to propose a shared future working group that would have the involvement of civic society and an independent chair. It appears that they like the idea, and they have used it in reference to the Haass talks group. The Haass talks group has received around 500 submissions. Mr Attwood physically demonstrated the extent of the bound volumes that we have to wade through in the coming days and weeks as we seek to harness those ideas expressed to find long-term solutions to difficult issues that, frankly, the Executive and the Assembly have not been able to grasp to date.

I support the motion, but I would like to put forward a number of qualifications. We heard that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister have sat on a review of the Civic Forum for a quite a number of years. Again, that is possibly not too surprising. We also heard that the deadline of 14 January may be somewhat unrealistic, so we may need to look at that again.

Any recalibrated Civic Forum would, of course, need to be focused and properly representative, not have an unwieldy or excessive budget and have a tight appointment process. I think that we can look to other jurisdictions for some guidance on such a formation. My understanding is that Scotland's Futures Forum has been able to establish itself with a balanced funding format and to utilise relevant expertise on discrete targeted themes that, in Northern Ireland, could include how we best approach the ageing population that we have here, for example. So, I think that that model could be given some serious examination.

As has been mentioned, we undoubtedly have a wealth of expertise across our society. There is undoubtedly a frustration in our community with the political process, and I think that this is a way to seek to re-engage people from across our community in Northern Ireland. To be effective, we ultimately need a truly diverse membership that adequately represents our community and that will be able to make a constructive contribution to finding solutions to problems in Northern Ireland. There are clearly individuals from all backgrounds in business, academia and the community and voluntary sector who could make meaningful contributions on extremely important themes, such as the economy, integrating education and protecting against the welfare reform that lies ahead.

The Alliance Party adds its support to the motion and thinks that the Assembly needs to get on with addressing this issue.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I will speak very briefly to the motion. I note that the proposers of the motion are keen to waste public money on what I believe to be a publicity stunt at a time when one party dragging its feet on welfare reform will cost the Northern Ireland block grant £5 million monthly from next January. This is a failure of politics, as the motion refers to, and, as a party, we will not be duplicating the services that we provide in the Assembly.

I do not believe that spending money on a civic forum can be justified. Where is the money coming from? What services will have to be cut to fund a civic forum? Where is the benefit to the people of Northern Ireland, as has been shown in the past?

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

No, I am moving on.

I believe that civic inclusion may be damaged, as funding could be lost to projects that provide a greater cost-benefit outcome. I also see the call for the Civic Forum as a duplication of the work of the Haass/O'Sullivan talks, and I fail to see how expecting groups or individuals to make the same submissions to a second body is of any real benefit to building inclusion.

In the current situation, where the Executive are already forced to make budget cuts, it is unreasonable to expect further budget cuts to be made to facilitate the political agenda of some in the House. That would be just another expensive consultation exercise at unjustified cost to the public purse and the creation of another quango that should never be recalled. I oppose the motion.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I support the motion. The Good Friday Agreement is about local representatives making decisions that affect us and the people that we represent on an inclusive basis. The Civic Forum was set up under the Good Friday Agreement to engage wider civic society, and its mission statement states:

"The Civic Forum will exercise effective community leadership and directly influence the building of a peaceful, prosperous, just, cohesive, healthy and plural society."

MLAs must use every opportunity to build and continue contact with non-governmental organisations, community groups, trade unions, the business community, agricultural and rural communities, women's groups, youth organisations and so forth. We must learn of their aspirations and needs and work with them to take those forward into the Assembly and the rest of the Good Friday Agreement institutions. Outreach to those communities is elected representatives' core work.

The Civic Forum is an important method of active participation, and it could bring about change whereby people from the voluntary, business and community sector feel as though they are making a contribution to improving others' quality of life. That can be a very rewarding experience. Active participation opens up the process, and the Civic Forum was agreed in the Good Friday Agreement as a means of ensuring transparency in the political process. As identified in the mission statement, we have to build a peaceful, prosperous, just, cohesive, healthy and plural society, and we can do that by widening and deepening our engagement with individuals and groups in our areas so that they start to identify with the need for change and for a new society that is based on human rights and equality. Elected representatives need to take on their leadership role in the building of that community for change.

It is my understanding that some good work was done while the forum existed. It provided a structured approach for people to come together. However, more was to be done: that is for sure. The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) carried out a review to determine its value and see how it could be best improved.

Democracy means the strength or power of the people. We have equality and fairness for all our citizens, regardless of race, religion, gender or political opinion. Human rights are enjoyed by all. Sinn Féin is committed to efficient government that is cost-effective. However, equality and representative safeguards cannot be diluted in any fashion. Equality should not cost money. If it does, it is money well spent.

The finance argument has been used when it suits. However, when flags protests happen, they cost the economy millions, and, overall, there is silence in that regard. It is ironic that some Members argue against a Civic Forum by stating that we have engagements via all-party groups (APGs), constituency offices and Committees. I agree. However, when the flags issue became a major problem, the unionists set up a unionist forum to address the underlying reasons for the protests. The problem with that is that it was not inclusive; it consisted of only unionists and loyalists talking.

The setting up of the Civic Forum is an important action that we can take to make our society more inclusive. It is important that we are socially aware, that we are of the people, and that we understand the problems and issues faced by community groups, NGOs and other groups that we are not part of. That is crucial. Elected reps need to exploit all available forums as opportunities through which to drive forward the participation of the people and their community groups, transparency in governance, and the accountability of the Assembly and its institutions to the people. We need to work to make those forums and working groups more than just talking shops, so that they impact on the business of the political institutions. In doing so, we will deepen the political process through social dialogue by contributing to peace, reconciliation and political progress.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I am pleased to speak on the motion today. It is fair to say that the Civic Forum was not highly regarded by my party. We have already heard examples of that. It was viewed by many as an expensive talking shop. It achieved little or nothing in the period in which it was in existence, and the wider electorate knew little or nothing about it.

My office has not received one single call to have the Civic Forum returned. I would be surprised if other Members have not experienced the same. We already have representation at local government through councils, through the Assembly, through Westminster and through Europe. Is anyone really going to benefit from another non-elected forum being put in place? It would give more opportunities for the media and public to criticise the cost of government, and probably rightly so. My party has consistently called for a reduction in the number of MLAs and Departments, so, in my and my party's view, it would be unrealistic to recall the Civic Forum on that basis. At a time of economic recession, would it not be better for some of the money that would be poured into such an unelected quango, as it has been described, to be put into mainstream government schemes so that the public would get some sort of repayment?

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I am pleased that the Member has agreed to give way. On the issue of the proposed Programme for Government target and objective of the reduction of the number of MLAs and Departments, does the Member concede that that objective was to have been reached by December 2012? Therefore, is the Member more concerned about holding up the failure of the Executive to the scrutiny of others than he is about participative democracy?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an added minute.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I hear what the Member is saying about the failure of the Programme for Government, but there are many good, positive areas in the Programme for Government as well. Certainly there are areas that are difficult, and there are difficult areas to be got through the Executive, but, at least most of the other parties, unlike your party, Mrs Kelly, are not threatening to throw the dummy out of the pram and walk away from the Executive. At least the other parties are putting something positive in to try to resolve some of those issues.

On the recall of the Civic Forum, Members have mentioned cost. If you look back at the previous Civic Forum, you will find that, on many occasions, it was difficult to even get the people who were appointed to it to come along. In fact, the Benches were very sparsely populated on many occasions. It would also be difficult to get a body that is representative of all in civic society in Northern Ireland. Some Members have alluded to that. Mr Lyttle alluded to making sure that it was representative of the whole community.

The flags protest has been mentioned. I notice that, for some Members opposite, the flags protest and the cost of it is something that is mentioned. The PSNI mentions this regularly as well. What about the cost of the stuff that we were talking about in the Matter of the Day — the kneecappings, the brutality and all of the other issues that are taking place in our community? I do not hear about any costs in relation to those issues from the PSNI or, indeed, from any of the Members on the opposite Benches. So perhaps we should look right across the board.

I am Chair of a Committee, and folk from civic society come along on a regular basis. Only last week, I had a conversation with members of the trade unions about some transport issues. So, many members from different areas of civic society attend Committees. In fact, perhaps three or four days a week in the Great Hall, you will get groups, many of them from civic society, appearing in the Long Gallery. Members who are democratically elected to this House are lobbied on a whole plethora of issues and concerns. I think that that is the way to do it, through this democratically elected forum.

So, I am afraid that the Civic Forum is an expensive talking shop that achieved nothing in the past. I think that it is unlikely to be able to achieve anything in the future. So, like other Members of my party, I oppose this motion.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. It has been an interesting debate so far in that most, if not all, of the contributors have said that they value civic engagement and welcome very much people participating in politics, particularly in conjunction with Members in this House within these institutions. That, therefore, is, for me, very positive, and as my two party colleagues have done, I support the motion. I may not agree entirely with the sentiment of the motion, and I do not think that it is terribly well written, either. Notwithstanding that, we very much share the purpose of the motion, which is to see the re-establishment of a Civic Forum, and we give our wholehearted support to that.

It is important to say that this is certainly not about, in our view, any attempt to have a mirror image of this Assembly or to have any sense of a second Chamber. This is, essentially, to make sure that we have people out there in wider society having the right and the ability and the format within which they can participate in the wider issues that affect all of us here in society. I would argue that, had we had a Civic Forum operational for the past number of years, we probably would not have needed to have a Haass process because, clearly, we would have had the benefit of people out there who have views on these matters as well as the political parties have. The fact that we as parties have not been able to resolve these difficulties tells us that there is a clear deficit in the substantive dialogue that is required to reach agreement on these matters.

I make it very clear that we do not want to see a mirror image of this House; we do not want a second Chamber. I think that these institutions, the Committees herein and other forms of consultation are very important. That all relates to specific policy issues and initiatives, and that is important. However, my party sees the role of a Civic Forum as being for people with a voice and a role in society to have the opportunity to participate in and have a say on wider issues, whether it is equality, symbols and emblems, the past and so on. All those voices are important and all those contributions are necessary. Therein lies a challenge for people in civic society.

In any developed democracy, anywhere around the world, there are people in trade unions, the community and voluntary sector, the business sector and in all Churches and faith organisations. That wide range of organisations has views on social matters, but we do not hear those views in general terms because those stakeholders, when confined to the limitations of the consultations of the institutions here, deal only with specific policy issues. I believe that wider civic society has a role to play, has a voice and has to have an input. Workers are involved in institutions. Why do the workforce, industry representatives or unions not have a voice on what flag flies over their roof, as well as on their working conditions? These are all matters for society and they will take more than politicians to resolve.

When we listen to contributions, we hear that people want much more dialogue. There are contradictions in the Chamber. The DUP says that it is against the Civic Forum because it is a creation of the Good Friday Agreement. Well, its Members are in this Building and these institutions, which are creations of the Good Friday Agreement. That has to be borne in mind by everybody here. The Good Friday Agreement was something that people all came to. There was a lot of give and take, and I think that a lot of hope was created. People in this room and others like us, people within the political world, have squandered some of the good hope that was generated in 1998. I think that we have an opportunity, through the re-establishment of the Civic Forum, to recreate some of that hope. It will not solve all the problems, but it will give more people a voice.

Ultimately, the whole ethos of and intent behind these institutions and the way in which they were organised was to make sure that we undo the decades of exclusivity. People in this society were marginalised, oppressed and excluded. The whole peace process was about bringing all those voices around the table, giving people a sense of their own worth and giving people equality in broader society. The Civic Forum is one means of creating a place for people who have been in those positions in the past, and, more importantly, who have things to say about the future.

Unfortunately, the Ulster Unionist Party has once again demonstrated that it continues routinely to row back on every single component of the Good Friday Agreement. I think that that is to the shame of the current party leadership. I think that it was Mr Moutray who recalled a comment from John Taylor, Lord Kilclooney —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is almost gone.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

He was the man who said that he would not touch the Good Friday Agreement with a bargepole. Thankfully, we are all here as a consequence of the Good Friday Agreement, but we need to develop it.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The member's time is gone.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I am very glad to speak in favour of our motion. The reason for the motion is not that we are a broken record. We got the motion passed last April, but nothing has happened, unfortunately. We do not want to use our time to discuss things that we have already had passed by the House. Unfortunately, however, sometimes we have to do that, because it seems as though some people are not listening. We are lectured to all the time by the party opposite about democracy. A democratic decision was taken here, Mr Speaker, and nothing happened. I think that people need to realise that.

My party colleague Mr Attwood, in proposing the motion, talked very eloquently about the Haass talks and the fact that over 500 submissions have been received from people in civic society who have bothered to get organised and active to try to shape the future of this place. I think that that is a very welcome sign for our society. It should be a very welcome thing for this Government.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I will.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Does the Member agree that the extent and substance of the contributions to the Haass talks from civic society is demonstrative of the role that a Civic Forum could play in other issues? In relation to the Haass process in particular, does that show that it is incumbent on all parties involved to agree long-term solutions to all the issues that are on the table?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an added minute.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thanks very much. I thank the Member as well for the added minute.

The Member said exactly what I think. It says something very positive about our society that so many people in civic society are prepared to become involved in a process that, let us be honest, at the beginning, not a lot of people had a lot of hope for. We have always been hopeful about the Haass talks, and we still are. We are determined to make sure that those agreements can be made.

It has been alluded to, but the point of and reason for the Haass talks is that politics and this place failed. We had to spend tens of millions of pounds policing disputes on our streets in Belfast. Whatever about the reasons for that — this may not be the right time to discuss the reasons behind those protests — the fact is that it happened. The fact is that large sections of our society told us that they were not happy with where we were going and how we were leading things. Maybe that should tell us something. Maybe we should wake up and listen to those people out there — I might not agree with them — who were on the streets telling us that politics is not working. In particular, maybe we should listen to the people who have gone to the bother of submitting documents to the Haass talks to tell us how they think that they can become involved in society. Those people did not do that because they are anti-politics, anti-democracy or anti-Stormont Assembly. Those people did it because they want it to work. They want this place to work, and they want to help shape a better society for all our people in Northern Ireland. Sometimes they are very far ahead of this place when it comes to that.

Mr Speaker, take the example of our city in the last year and even before that. You have had a very key part to play in all that. The example is of the creation of a culture of constant conversation in which people, from all different sections of society, get together and look at problems that might arise six months down the line. That is an example that this whole place can learn from. Why not do it in a Civic Forum? Why not cut these issues off at the pass? Why not realise —

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Does he not also agree that the role of a Civic Forum is not to deal with matters in a pressure cooker forum, in which we are consulted and consultations have time limits, but to be there genuinely to take the broad picture and take non-pressure cooker time to look at issues and debates over a great length of time? We have to bear in mind that organisations such as trade unions, churches and various other actors and players in civic society have their own roles and remits and that a Civic Forum is only a part of what they want to do. However, when they come together, they have an amazing contribution to make.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member very much for his contribution. He is absolutely right. That is the point of a Civic Forum. It is so that people can sit down quietly — out of the way, not in here — to debate and discuss and try to solve problems before they arise. That is a true benefit of a Civic Forum.

We should not be afraid of it. If people are criticising the Northern Ireland Assembly, they will do it anyway. Why not make them part of the process so that they are not only flagging up the problems but become part of the solution? That is the role of the Civic Forum. I do not understand why we would be afraid of that. People talk about cost. The cost of the Civic Forum the last time around was half a million pounds. It cost £18 million to police the flags protest. I do not know what it has cost up to now with Twaddell Avenue and all the other things that have happened.

Leaving those issues to the side, the very fact that those things happened is because of this place's failure to get to grips with some of the issues that were coming down the line but that we had not realised were happening. That is very sad. The Civic Forum would have been able to head some of those issues off at the pass.

I have to say —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time has almost gone.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

— that I am very disappointed that the Ulster Unionist Party has again rolled back from the Good Friday Agreement, whether it is on the Civic Forum, the North/South forum or whatever else. I am surprised to hear that the DUP and the Ulster Unionists —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time has gone.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

— are against what were called quasi-democratic or quasi-parliamentary forums —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mike Nesbitt.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

May I begin by apologising that I was not in the Chamber for the beginning of the debate? As Chair of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, I was in the Long Gallery to welcome His Excellency Mr Tulga Narkhuu of Mongolia, who is its ambassador to the Court of St James's.

He was opening an exhibition in the Long Gallery, which I commend to Members. You will learn much about the history and the people of Mongolia, not least about their most famous son, Genghis Khan, who was probably not a fan of civic fora.

Two Members accused the Ulster Unionist Party of trying to row back from the Good Friday Agreement. That is not the case. Let us remind ourselves that the fundamentals of the Good Friday Agreement were not based on a civic forum but on the concepts of reconciliation, tolerance, mutual trust, partnership, equality and mutual respect. Delivering on those fundamentals is down to us, the Members of the Legislative Assembly —

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I will give way in one minute, Mr Maskey. That will be done not by others in another place but by us in the Chamber, the Committee Rooms, the all-party groups and the other workings that are undertaken by the 108 Members of the Legislative Assembly. The Ulster Unionist Party remains 100% wedded to delivering on those fundamentals.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I thank the Member for giving way. Just a few minutes ago, the Member's party colleague said that his party is opposed to the motion. The motion simply calls for the re-establishment of the Civic Forum. That is a direct requirement of the Good Friday Agreement, which your party supported, albeit lukewarmly.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an added minute.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I disagree with the Member's characterisation of the support of the Ulster Unionist Party for the Good Friday Agreement.

The Civic Forum is in the agreement and in legislation. However, not all legislation is good legislation. I think that the experience of those who took part in the Civic Forum and those who reviewed it was that it was not the best mechanism for engaging in consultative and participative democracy. We have no ideological difficulty with participative or consultative democracy. It is a question of whether the forum, as constituted, was the best mechanism, and very few, if any, believe that it was.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for giving way. He mentioned the review of the Civic Forum. The review findings have never been published, so how can you make a judgement on the findings? OFMDFM failed and refused, under FOI or any other mechanism, to publish the report.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

By way of answer I would say that, as far as I know, you tabled the motion before any of us were in receipt of the 500-plus submissions to the Haass process, which we now have. However, your motion refers to the "authority" and wisdom of those submissions. How could you know that about submissions that you had not had the opportunity to study? I have no doubt that many of the submissions are full of authority and wisdom. I look forward to reading them, and I am sure that Mr Lyttle did not really mean that he felt that he was going to have to "wade through" the four volumes of Haass submissions. I am sure that we will all enjoy looking at them.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for giving me the opportunity to correct any inaccurate inference on my part, if there was any. It is the contrary. I agree with the motion. There is extreme utility in those submissions, and it is a privilege to have been able to read through them.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his clarification.

As I said, I think that the question is how you best go about it. A few weeks ago, the Ulster Unionist Party tabled a motion on consultation. We made it clear that we spend a lot of money consulting with the public, but how we do that is very variable, depending on the Minister and the Department. We called on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to publish a review of best practice. Like the SDLP, we could stand here and say that that motion was passed by the House yet nothing has been done about it, but that is the case. Hopefully, in the fullness of time, the First Minister and deputy First Minister will come back and talk about how best we can consult.

As I said, we are not ideologically opposed to engaging with the public on these issues. However, are we trying to reinvent the wheel? Take the economy, for example. We have the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce, Pubs of Ulster and the Northern Ireland Independent Retail Trade Association. Is it not a question of how well the House and Executive engage with those experts to seek their views?

For engaging with the voluntary and community sector, we have the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action (NICVA). Even NICVA, and I point this out to Mrs Kelly, was critical of the way that the Civic Forum was run. NICVA supported a social partnership body, but it felt that there were flaws in the Civic Forum, in its structure and its operation. I understand the frustration at the review not being published by OFMDFM, because it would be useful. However, this party cannot support a motion that calls for the Civic Forum simply to come back in its old form by January 2014.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

I welcome the motion and am happy to support it. I regret that we have to debate the issue for a second time in such a short period.

The return of the Civic Forum would be a welcome addition to public and political discourse in Northern Ireland. It is vital that the forum and the strong civic voice that it provides are heard. It is vital that people are engaged in the process, and we do, at times, need a critical friend to counteract the work that is going on here.

So, if we were to reconstitute the Civic Forum, we would need to give some thought to what it might look like, what form it might take and who would be on it, as well as clearly defining its role. Overall, there would be benefits to its reintroduction.

I warn of some of the downsides: things that would have to be worked out if the forum were reconstituted. I do not want a Civic Forum that is almost a challenge to the representative democracy of the House. It has to be clear from the start that the Assembly is where the people's representatives are — people were elected to here — and that the forum would be an addition to that and a useful body that would bring the knowledge of the various strands of civic society together.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. He prides himself on being on the ground in South Down and further afield. Has he met a single person in the past decade who expressed any problem with there not being a Civic Forum or pressed him to have it reopened? Since it was suspended many years ago, no one has written, e-mailed or spoken to me about it.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an added minute.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

I respectfully suggest that they knew his view on the subject and that writing to or e-mailing him about it could be counterproductive.

Alban Maginness (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for giving way. On the latter point that Mr Wells raised, has the Member met in his constituency people who are alienated from politics and who are looking for an alternative way of expressing their point of view?

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

I have indeed. We have only to look at the voter turnout at times to see evidence of disengagement. At our conference on Saturday, I used the stat that less than 10% of people think that this place is doing a good job. There is enormous public alienation here, and that comes back to the dysfunctionality of the Executive and the House. That is one thing that I warn about if we reconstitute the forum: we must not devolve our dysfunctionality to the Civic Forum. I also warned about devolving our dysfunctionality to local councils, because that is where we get completely stuck.

We have listened to various Members speaking here. Alex Maskey, quite rightly, recognised that if we had had the Civic Forum, we might well have avoided a Haass-style talks process, which is an important point. We pretty well managed to create a homemade crisis. I accept that not all the submissions are on public record, but we know from talking to various groups what they are likely to be. We hear from colleagues about the foot-dragging that goes on in this place over welfare reform, one side blaming the other. We see £80 million of social investment money parked and not used. Those are signs of our dysfunction in this House that we are not tackling.

What do we need from a civic forum? We need the tolerance and partnership that Mr Nesbitt spoke about. I heard him speak before about the spirit, and not just the letter, of the Good Friday Agreement. I suggest to him, Mr Speaker, that constituting a Civic Forum is exactly what the spirit of the agreement is about. I agree with other Members that it is sad that the Ulster Unionist Party is moving back from a firmly pro-Good Friday Agreement position. There is nothing that I can do about that now, but it is hugely regrettable and a mistake to move back from the firm position of supporting the agreement.

We need something that retains accountable and responsible representative democracy. We cannot devolve our dysfunction to a Civic Forum. We must ensure that civic society remains a critical friend as opposed to almost a complicit friend.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

It is important at this stage to reiterate our various party support for participative democracy and recognise the role that civic society has in reaching all sorts of solutions to our varied problems.

A number of Members reflected on what appears to be the rollback of the Ulster Unionist Party from aspects of the Good Friday Agreement, despite the fact that over 78% of people in the North, and 98% on the island as a whole, voted for the agreement. Some people would do well to reflect that it is the will of the people.

Some Members spoke about an expensive talking shop, and here we are sitting in one. It is really incredible when one looks at the December recess looming, yet when one looks at the business of the Assembly, other than the transposition of legislation that has to be introduced here from Westminster, very little legislation is coming across from any ministerial portfolio.

It is sad to reflect once again that despite the fact that we have four Ministers —

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I will in a second.

Despite the fact that we have four Ministers in the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, not one chose to make themselves available to respond to the debate.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I notice that the Member used the term "Ministers". I assume that she is including her own party's Minister in that.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

As the Member opposite will know, there have been significant delays in RPA and other legislation because OFMDFM will not allow them to go forward. As the Member well knows, OFMDFM controls the legislation, so that is where those questions should be directed. I am sure that the Member also knows that not more than three weeks ago, the OFMDFM Committee had to cancel its meeting because the reports and agenda had not been made available to it by the Ministers' Department. If one thinks that the Civic Forum at a cost of £500,000 could be an expensive talking shop, they need to look more introspectively at their own contribution and what their role here has been.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Does the Member agree that we are still a fledgling democracy and that, as such, we need the widest possible spectrum of support? It is absolute arrogance to believe that the Assembly can run this place on its own, without widespread support from the wider community.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for his contribution. It reflects the contributions of others in recognising the huge number of submissions by the community and voluntary sectors and, indeed, wider society. Mr Attwood referred to individuals who made submissions to the Haass/O'Sullivan talks of their own accord.

There has been a failure of political leadership in dealing with some of the thornier issues of our past and some of the issues around a shared future and the whole cost of parading. I think that it was Mr McCallister who said that the Civic Forum could be a critical friend: that is what it was always envisaged to be. When OFMDFM refuses to publish the findings of the review, one can only conclude that the review findings were in favour of a Civic Forum, given the dislike of the party opposite, in particular, of the notion of a Civic Forum and that wider engagement with civic society. I do not understand what it has to fear from a critical friend in the delivery.

When this term of office commenced, I think that it was the First Minister who said that the Executive would be judged on delivery. Here we are, over two years into that delivery, yet it is questionable what has been delivered. I think that it was again Mr McCallister who referred to the £80 million social investment fund, which he said had not been spent. That is not entirely accurate, given that consultants have benefited to the tune of over £400,000, but wider society has not benefited. Yet, we see rising levels of poverty and the threat that they will rise further as a result of the welfare reform proposals.

I do not think that anyone can have anything to fear from the motion. Hiding behind a potential cost of half a million pounds is not a good argument. In referring to you, Mr Speaker, Mr Eastwood talked about the culture of conversation in Derry. It is not that long ago that there were horrific images of Derry, particularly around parading. How much times have moved on, and that is because people have engaged with each other. It is not just the political leaders who engaged; it was wider society that reached a conclusion. Wider society can challenge politicians to stretch themselves to move beyond their hinterland and take some risks for the greater good of the community and not just be concerned about how their own vote might rise or fall according to the decisions that they take.

A number of contributors from the Sinn Féin Benches were very much in favour of the amendment and the recall of the Civic Forum, and I welcome that. They recognise the talents and skills of wider society in leading to a more inclusive future for us all and a more inclusive society. Some of them talked about how equality is not something that we should fear, and, if there is a cost of half a million pounds for equality, so be it. One of the lessons of the past is that we had an unequal society, and we all know what happened as a consequence.

Mr Attwood, in his opening remarks, talked about the wisdom of civic society and having the right values, hope and ambition for all our futures. I do not think that too many of us, other than some on the other Benches, could disagree with that. Those of you on the other Benches have recognised the wisdom, hope and ambition of many contributors to consultation exercises and of witnesses before Committees. You have recognised the value of the contribution that others make in those instances.

There is one other point that I want to make, and it concerns the St Andrews legislation. I think that it was the First Minister again who shouted from the rooftops about how the points that he got into the St Andrews Agreement would ensure that there was greater accountability of Ministers and greater accountability and authority of the Assembly. That has proven not to be the case, when you reflect on the fact that it is now months since this democratically elected Chamber held a democratic vote and the majority voted in favour of the re-establishment of the Civic Forum. Yet, it has failed to materialise. That calls into question much of the self-pronounced praise and reflection of individuals who do not think that they should be present to hear what is said in the Assembly, which has a clear role and responsibility to hold to account the Executive and to scrutinise its action or, more appropriately, its inaction over a number of years now.

Once again, I urge the Members opposite, particularly the Ulster Unionist Party, which had the courage in 1998 and attempted to move society forward in accepting the Good Friday Agreement, to reflect and to endorse what was the will of the people, as reflected in the referenda on the Good Friday Agreement or, if they prefer, the Belfast Agreement.

Question put.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 48; Noes 45.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

As Members are aware, Standing Orders now provide that topical questions will be taken after the listed questions. We will have 30 minutes of oral questions and 15 minutes of topical questions.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

1. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to outline the budget for the panel of parties of the Northern Ireland Executive chaired by Dr Richard Haass. (AQO 5000/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Costs relating to the work of the panel of parties are being met by the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM). They include the expenses incurred by the Haass team, any additional expenditure such as travel and subsistence that directly relates to its work and a small remuneration to its researcher. We are projecting that the likely cost will be approximately £135,000, with costs to date totalling £73,000. It is important to record once again our appreciation of the fact that Richard Haass and Meghan O'Sullivan have offered their services on a pro bono basis. Therefore, they are not taking a fee for their time or the time incurred by their press officer and an additional researcher.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. He will be aware that he has a budget line of £2·2 million in the current year and £2·39 million in 2014-15 for a body called the Public Assemblies, Parades and Protests Body. Will he update the House on the activity of that organisation?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

We have, of course, made funding available for anything that might arise out of the Haass talks. I hope that, as Dr Haass has indicated, all parties will roll up their sleeves and come seriously to the table over the next number of weeks so that we might reach some agreed conclusion as a result of the Haass talks. The Department is ready to respond to any conclusion that might be reached.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

What is the First Minister's view on whether a single, independent legacy commission with a framework of investigation and information recovery, thematic inquiry and storytelling could form the basis of a comprehensive mechanism for dealing with the past, as part of the Haass talks?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

It is important that, when we collectively appoint somebody to carry out the role of facilitating all-party dialogue on these matters, we negotiate with the panel of parties rather than across the Floor of the Assembly. There are aspects of that to which I would respond warmly and others that would need to be drilled down a little before we could reach a conclusion. Certainly, however, there seems to be some consensus about the ability of victims to tell their stories without cross-examination or interrogation.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Notwithstanding all the challenges that face the process in the weeks ahead, what is the First Minister's estimate of confidence in the ability of Mr Haass and his team to produce a report by Christmas?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

We need to be very clear that this is not about putting the onus on Dr Haass and Meghan O'Sullivan. If there is going to be a positive outcome, it will be because the Executive parties that are on that panel reach a conclusion. That depends very largely on whether those parties are going to retreat into old ways because there is an election or two next year or whether they are prepared to look at what is in the best long-term interests of the people of Northern Ireland. I hope that it is the latter. My party is certainly up for attempting to resolve the differences on these matters. Undoubtedly, it will be more likely that we will get agreement on issues relating to parades than on flags, and it will be easier to get agreement on flags than on the past.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Given the recent comments of the SDLP that the chair should bring forward his own recommendations, will the First Minister confirm the remit of the panel in relation to consultation and resulting recommendations?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The panel has been working with Dr Haass and Meghan O'Sullivan in the process of hearing the views of stakeholders, interested parties and individuals around the Province. That material is being collated. The next stage is when we will attempt to get agreements. The terms of reference are very clear and put the onus on the panel to reach agreement; they do not put the onus on the facilitator. He is there to urge and to meet the overall desire of the panel in reaching agreement; it is not his role or responsibility to reach agreement for us. I have no doubt that he may have views, and I have no doubt that he may want to express those views, but the recommendations, according to the terms of reference, will come from the panel alone.

Joe Byrne (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Does the First Minister agree that issues such as dealing with the past are so paramount to the people that the costs of the Haass process would be negligible in relation to the wider remit and importance of making sure that we get the right outcomes at this juncture?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I have always had difficulty trying to define what people mean by dealing with the past. If dealing with the past requires us to have a shared narrative of history, I think it is impossible for that to happen. If it is about how we deal with those who are the victims of the past, I think that it is possible to get agreement on how we might ensure that those who have suffered as a result of the past are treated in a certain way and have a proper place in the future of Northern Ireland. There is clearly a range of issues about how we deal with certain events of the past that have caused very considerable problems over the past number of months. I am not sure how, on the one side, it is possible for some people to look at an event in the past as something that retraumatises them, while somebody else, at the same time, thinks that it is something worthy of celebration or commemoration.

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, following their trip to the USA in October 2013, what measures are being taken by their Department to attract further investment. (AQO 5001/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The deputy First Minister and I travelled to Boston and Chicago from 21 to 25 October for a number of engagements to promote the Northern Ireland business message and to build on the hugely successful economic conference. Our five-day visit was an opportunity to reinforce our bonds with existing and potential investors in the US, to promote Northern Ireland as an attractive investment location and to promote healthcare and university collaboration. Our attendance at a significant EU/US Connected Health conference in Boston, attended by an international audience from over 20 countries, provided a platform to showcase our growing expertise in the Connected Health arena. We were pleased to have the support of our colleague, the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, who also spoke at the conference. We highlighted the wider research and development agenda at meetings with representatives of the US universities that have established links with Queen's University Belfast and the University of Ulster.

In Boston, we addressed an audience of some 170 senior business executives on the competitive advantages that Northern Ireland has to offer. In Chicago and Peoria, we visited the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Caterpillar. Those are two of our most important US investors. The visit to Caterpillar allowed us to meet the company's top management team and reiterate the Executive's support for consolidating relationships with existing investors. While there, we were particularly pleased to welcome a further investment by Caterpillar to expand its manufacturing business here, which reinforces our position as an investment location for global companies. Caterpillar is an important investor, not only regarding jobs and wealth creation but through the credibility its presence gives to doing business in Northern Ireland.

In summary, the visit provided an excellent opportunity to strengthen relationships with existing investors and to begin relationships with potential new ones. It was an extremely successful visit, and we look forward to seeing the fruits of that in the months to come.

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. Given the success of the recent trip to the United States, are any other investment trips planned?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Of course, the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is constantly going out around the world trying to encourage investors into Northern Ireland. The next visit that the deputy First Minister and I are making is to Japan in the first week in December. We were invited there by Prime Minister Abe when he was here at the G8 summit, and we look forward to meeting some of the Japanese companies that already invest in Northern Ireland as well, hopefully, as some potential new ones.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. Will the First Minister provide us with any detail on progress made since the recent investment conference in Belfast?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Invest Northern Ireland undertook the task of carrying out the follow-up work. It is involved in speaking to the companies that were present and those who made positive remarks during the conference. We have no doubts that positive news will arise from the economic conference, but these matters take some time. Board decisions have to be taken, and there has to be follow-up work between companies and Invest Northern Ireland on any incentives that might be offered.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. Is the First Minister confident that the forthcoming investment trip to Japan will yield further inward investment in jobs?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

In keeping with every other visit that we have made, there have been positive outcomes. There is the potential of inward investment from Japan, but it is not that alone. Wherever we go, we attempt to encourage people in that jurisdiction to come to Northern Ireland as visitors to aid our tourist industry, and we look at opportunities for trade between our two countries. We expect to make some progress in all those areas. It must be pointed out that we already have significant investment from Japan.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

3. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the social investment fund. (AQO 5002/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

On 28 February, the social investment fund (SIF) steering group submitted area plans for each of their zones. Representatives of the wider community were involved in identifying the issues to be addressed and prioritising the interventions for inclusion in the plan, thus ensuring that they reflected needs identified locally. The plans included a total of 89 projects across nine zones, prioritised by the steering group in each investment zone. In contrast to recent reports, there is no outstanding decision by Ministers on zone allocations. Approximately £40 million of projects have successfully come through the robust internal economic appraisal process. Officials are meeting with all the chairs of the steering groups this week to talk through the indicative budget for each zone and the process of project implementation. I expect projects that have gone successfully through the process to be informed over the next few weeks. We anticipate further announcements very shortly.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I thank the First Minister for his update and welcome the good news contained therein. What parameters are used to assess whether a project is worthy? Will the First Minister reassure us that moneys will be allocated, by and large, on the basis of objective need?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

On the Member's latter point, yes, of course: the whole purpose of the project is to try to address need. Objective need became a difficult concept to measure because the zones are of different sizes. It was not simply a case of making a determination as if they were all the same size. We had to take objective need and the size of the areas into account. SIF is, of course, part of our overall suite of measures in the Delivering Social Change policy in our Department, so we had an eye on other allocations within the overall objective of delivering social change.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

Will the First Minister outline how much more the 89 projects totalled than the £80 million in the funding pot? What action is he considering taking to support those who will not benefit from the social investment fund?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

As the House will probably have already guessed, the applications came to considerably more than £80 million. I think that the total was about £130 million. Those applications are being addressed on the basis of the priorities that the zones placed on them. They have to go through a robust business case, and, of course, our Department and the Department of Finance and Personnel are involved in that. It means that there is a shortfall. Towards the end of the scheme, we will assess the value of SIF and whether it should be extended. The deputy First Minister and I have been looking at whether there is a case for taking applications for some smaller grant schemes. There had been some indication that we might look at having £1 million worth of schemes, maybe 50 schemes at £20,000 each. Clearly, those who were unsuccessful in coming through the initial tranche might look to that kind of scheme if it were approved by the Department.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat , a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chéad-Aire. Will the First Minister indicate when money is likely to hit the ground to fund area priorities?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The one thing that we have been certain about is that the money is ring-fenced, so nobody else is going off to spend it. The money is there to be spent, and we want to get it out through the door as quickly as possible. As I said, if there is something like £120 million worth of schemes — slightly more than £40 million worth of schemes have already gone through the process — there is no reason why money cannot start going out to those schemes immediately, provided that they are in the top two of a zone's priorities. That is the purpose of the discussions that will take place between the chairperson of each zone and officials over the coming days.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the First Minister confirm that the fund has been delayed because of a failure to agree on the split between mainly nationalist and mainly unionist communities?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

No, I will not confirm that. The processes in our Department are not as vulgar as that. If one looked at the schemes that have come forward, one would see that a very high proportion of them benefit both sections of our community. Indeed, if one looked at the various zones, even where a particular section of the community might be in a significant minority, one would see that, given the overall allocation of schemes from the zone, they have been treated well. When the schemes start to play out, we will see that they have contributed to overall community cohesion, which, I think, is the Member's wish.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what will be the tangible evidence of a successful outcome of Together: Building a United Community. (AQO 5003/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I will ask junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer this question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

On 23 May this year, we published the good relations strategy, Together: Building a United Community, which is designed to bring about interaction, mutual respect and social cohesion across our community. The strategy contains over 40 separate actions and commitments, and seven of those are the headline actions that were announced on 9 May. We have tasked design groups to work up proposals for the indicative costs and implementation timescales for those projects.

Recognising and valuing the importance of projects and groups that are engaged in the areas that the strategy will impact upon, officials have begun an intensive period of engagement with key stakeholders to seek their input into the design process. Following that engagement, we expect the design groups to be in a position to report back to us in the near future. Through this early engagement, we have been able to identify areas where it will be possible to trial some activities, building on the positive relationships and good community work already in place, prior to full-scale operation. Those trials will allow and enable real outputs linked to the strategic aims and objectives of the strategy to be achieved in the near term. The remaining actions and commitments range from the longer-term projects around, for example, the introduction of the new equality and good relations commission, which will require primary legislation, to shorter-term and more immediate actions. We are working closely with other relevant Departments to progress all those issues and actions.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Does the junior Minister agree that building a united community for the future is made much easier if people are clear about their past? Further to that, does he agree that, across the community, people know those who were engaged in terror in the past and want frank and honest admissions as we try to build a united community, and that, above all, they know the issues that are out there and know the difference between genuine and synthetic responses?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We call on everybody who has any information on either their own past or about criminality and terrorism to bring that forward to the police. That is the right thing to do, and it is imperative that everyone takes on that responsibility to fess up to their past, not only to what they have done but for the benefit of those who are suffering and for whom that information could be very helpful. Of course, the justice process continues, and there will always be a legal justice process, and anybody involved in any crime should be made amenable to that process.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister give us an update on the United Youth programme?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We continue to work with a number of agencies together. As junior Ministers, we were out recently in Belfast seeing on the ground what is happening between young people from the Hammer youth club in the Shankill and the Ardoyne youth club that is associated with Holy Cross. As our officials continue to work up the programme, we will, as I outlined in my earlier answer, bring details to the House in due course.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Following on from that, Minister, could you perhaps share with us which Departments are likely to be involved and whether DEL will be taking the lead on the United Youth programme?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Given the cross-curricular nature of many Departments, we will involve each of them, and we regularly have bilateral meetings with individual Ministers on areas where they have responsibility. Minister Farry from DEL has met us on a number of occasions. In fact, we have been launching projects with him where there is a synergy between our two Departments. There are no divisions or difficulties, and all Departments are working together on the programme, and where it is appropriate to involve them or utilise that expertise and research, we will do so.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

5. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether they intend to take any action relating to the decision of the Minister of the Environment regarding the Planning Bill. (AQO 5004/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Yes, we will meet the Minister of the Environment in the near future to discuss the position that the Executive should take on the matter. It would have been better if the Minister had had that meeting before he made his announcement. The issue of planning remains a key element in the development of our local economy. It is still the case that many potential investors that we speak to throughout the world and who are looking to invest in Northern Ireland have been put off by our planning system. It is internationally recognised that Northern Ireland has a poor planning outcome. An example of that are the remarks from the Sainsbury's chief executive, Justin King. He said that a lack of speed, logic and joined-up thinking when it came to issuing planning permissions makes Northern Ireland a challenging place in which to invest. If we are serious about getting jobs into Northern Ireland, we need to look at our planning system and ensure that it delivers the right outcomes.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I understand exactly what the Minister means. Does he, however, accept that the current position indicates that the amendments tabled by Sinn Féin and the DUP were held to be illegal following legal advice that was sought? Does he agree that, given those facts, the original Bill without the amendments is probably better than no Bill at all?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I do not accept the premise on which the Member's question was asked. I think that we all know that there are differing legal opinions. The Attorney General takes one position on those matters, and the QC who advises the Department takes a different one. To me, the right thing to do would have been to put the legislation through the Assembly and allow it to be tested in the courts if necessary. I hope that we can reach some agreement on how we should go forward. A number of options are available to us. I know that the Member will be aware that the matter forms part of the economic pact that we signed on behalf of the Executive with the Prime Minister. It is, therefore, Executive policy. Ministers are required to meet and uphold all the decisions taken by the Executive, so I hope that we can find a way through the problem.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

The First Minister said that the planning provisions were a key part of the economic package agreed with the Prime Minister. The Planning Bill was passed by the Assembly at Consideration Stage, so does he believe that the Environment Minister is in breach of the Pledge of Office?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Clearly, the Pledge of Office requires every Minister to act in accordance with decisions taken by the Executive. The Executive took a clear decision on the matters; it is recorded in the minutes of the Executive meeting. Therefore, yes, the Environment Minister is in breach of the Pledge of Office. However, without going into his position, it is important that we resolve the issue and move forward on planning. Planning continues to be a significant problem in Northern Ireland, and we have to address that. New legislation will be required to address some of the weaknesses in the planning system at present.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister outline any concerns that have been raised by large-scale investors while on investment visits about the perception of our planning processes?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The deputy First Minister and I have been out and about trying to encourage business to come. I can recall, for instance, being in Australia when I was Minister for Regional Development. There was some news coverage of it out in Australia, as a result of which I was asked to meet one of the most significant development companies in the world. I found that the person in charge of finding locations had originally lived in Northern Ireland. That person wanted to invest here but would not go near Northern Ireland with a bargepole because of the length of time that it took to get planning applications through and the likelihood of judicial review even when they were got through. There are many problems out there. We bury our head in the sand if we are not prepared to face up to them. The deputy First Minister and I are not saying that our way is the only way in which it can be done, but nobody has suggested a better way of ensuring that we improve the system.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

During a television interview recently, the Minister's colleague Mr Sammy Wilson said — I am quoting from memory — that the two amendments to the Planning Bill could be brought forward via a private Member's Bill or by the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Mrs Arlene Foster. Will the Minister clarify whether that is the position that the DUP is taking?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

No. The position that we are taking is that the deputy First Minister and I have agreed with the Minister of the Environment that we should sit down to try to resolve the issues. It is far better that we get some mutually satisfactory outcome. Of course, as I indicated to the Member for East Belfast, who even though we are still on his question has left the Chamber, a number of options are open to us. One of those options is that a private Member's Bill could be brought forward. Another option is that another Minister could bring the Bill forward. However, the best option by far is that we get some agreement with the Minister responsible for the Department on how we move forward.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That ends the period for listed questions. We will now move to 15 minutes of topical questions.

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

1. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, as we approach the first anniversary of Belfast City Council’s decision to remove the Union flag, whether they believe that the protest march planned for 30 November should take place. (AQT 361/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The first thing that I should say is that there are very few people in the Chamber who have not been involved in protest politics at some stage in their careers. So I think that we need to recognise that demonstrations, protests and picketing are part of the democratic process. They allow people to express their views and to show opposition. So, of course, we support people's right to demonstrate, providing, of course, that they do it within the law and peacefully. Equally, of course, we have to defend other rights, including the rights of traders who want to ensure that their businesses can remain open and that they have the opportunity to be able to trade, particularly in the run-up to Christmas, which counts for a significant part of their business. Of course, there are also the rights of consumers who want to avail themselves of those services. So, as is so often the case in Northern Ireland, we are dealing with competing rights.

Given that the actual anniversary of the decision by Belfast City Council comes earlier in the week than the Saturday and that the decision that led to the flag being lowered occurred on a day other than Saturday, it appears to me that a lunchtime protest would do less violence to trade in Belfast and would be a more accurate way to protest against the people who took the decision. I suspect that very few of those people will be in the City Hall on a Saturday. Although it is not ideal for anybody, it would be a worthwhile compromise.

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. Does the First Minister believe that such demonstrations can succeed in effecting change?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I am not sure that even the organisers believe that they will effect change by the protest. We have all been involved in protests, and they are held to highlight an issue to ensure that people are aware of concerns. I suspect that the objective of this particular demonstration is to show that, even a year afterwards, people are still opposed to the council's decision. If change is to take place, it will take place through the democratic process, which means involvement in politics, involvement in elections and making sure that people who represent your views are elected to Belfast City Council in the future. That is the way to make real change.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether they agree with the leader of NI21 who, at his party conference on Saturday, proposed greater fiscal powers for the Assembly. (AQT 362/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

We have, of course, as an Executive, sought additional fiscal powers, and, unlike other parts of the United Kingdom, we have been successful with, for instance, air passenger duty for long-haul flights. We are also pursuing additional fiscal powers on corporation tax. However, I think that the Member for Lagan Valley was referring to income tax powers. I note that the Member did not tell anybody during his speech whether his intention was to raise or to lower taxes. I am always suspicious about people who seek a headline, perhaps without having done any research, and who do not give details of their intentions. I suppose that the "Basil tax" might be to have an additional tax burden on women who are over size 12 or, perhaps, to give tax breaks to polygamists.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. What are the Executive doing with the tax-raising powers that they already have to make business more competitive and to keep the cost of living down for householders right around this Province?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I think we should point out that we have that ability for local taxes. Local taxes could refer to the regional rate, water charges and so forth. It is worth noting that Scotland has had a power in relation to income tax for about 14 years now and has never used it. That should perhaps be a lesson to people as to what is likely to happen if it were to come here. If we are to reduce income tax by having a local power, that means reducing the services that are available to our community. I have not been convinced that there is any real advantage in devolving income tax powers.

As to what we are doing already, we have used the ability to bring to zero air passenger duty to ensure that we retain the connection with the United States, which was vital from an investment point of view. We are seeking to have the ability to set corporation tax, because we want to reduce it to enhance our offering and the package available to investors. For us, it is to have a positive outcome with our economy that we have used it. Where we have held down the regional rate and refused to bring in water charges, it is because we recognise that, particularly during this period of recession, a very heavy burden was being carried by householders in Northern Ireland.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

3. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether, in the wake of a further attack on a constituency office, attacks on the police and the shooting of a 15-year-old child, they feel that Executive Ministers are doing enough to separate themselves from those who seek to threaten democracy and the rule of law. (AQT 363/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The deputy First Minister and I have publicly expressed our condemnation of these actions. I sense a feeling in our community of, almost, helplessness to be able to affect what is happening at the hands of violent organisations and individuals. However, the public are not powerless in these matters. We all have the ability to stand up to agitators and aggressors; no matter who they claim to represent, we all have the right and ability to speak out against them. We can provide evidence, where it is available, to the police, to ensure that prosecutions take place. We must always show such organisations and individuals that they cannot succeed and demonstrate that, the more that they do, the more they will be resisted.

Everyone in the House can, I believe, recall the days when we woke up in the morning to headlines of mayhem and misery. We can all recount the horrors and tragedies of the past. I do not believe that anyone wants to go back to the bad old days. When devolution returned to Northern Ireland in 2007, we all committed and pledged ourselves to this new era in Northern Ireland and to the peace and stability that had been created. I hope that each of us will renew that pledge today.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. Public opinion suggests that it is important that no elected representative sends mixed messages or gives comfort or cover to those who would advocate breaking the law. Will the First Minister now call on Nelson McCausland to stop sharing platforms and media opportunities with people who are widely considered to have links to paramilitary organisations?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I think everybody recognises that elected representatives have clear responsibilities with their own constituents to try to do everything that they can to ensure that peace is maintained. The role of every elected representative in this House is to ensure that they make those views known to everybody they meet in society and do everything that they possibly can to overcome the difficulties that that might present them. I have no doubt that the Minister for Social Development uses all his powers of persuasion to attempt to resolve the issues that are causing real difficulty in his constituency and elsewhere.

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether they can confirm or deny that they agreed to the SEUPB’s withdrawal of the Narrow Water Bridge letter of offer at a recent North/South Ministerial Council pre-meeting. (AQT 364/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Quite contrary to that position, the deputy First Minister and I agreed at the meeting of the British-Irish Council that we would examine other ways of trying to keep the project alive. We both indicated that, in principle, we are supportive of the project. We recognised that the application came from Louth County Council and that there was a projected cost attached to it. The Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) was to give a certain amount of money, and the council was to pay the rest.

When the projected figures were found to be significantly less than the actual tender price, it became clear that Louth County Council could not, and was not prepared to, pay the balance. The position, therefore, is that we have to look at the project and see whether it can be brought forward in any other way. For instance, it was specifically mentioned that it was a pre-designed scheme, and we might look to see whether a design-and-build scheme would bring a better result. We might look to see whether a different specification might bring a different result. We might look to see whether there is any other opportunity for funding to come forward.

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh milé maith agat. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagra. I thank the First Minister for his answer. Given where we are now with the Narrow Water Bridge, will he go to the Minister of Finance and ask him to find new moneys so that Belfast jumps first and this great project goes forward?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The SEUPB has already indicated that it is looking to allocate the funds elsewhere because it does not believe that it can proceed with the present timetable. We must respect its decision. The SEUPB has the responsibility to ensure that the money is spent and that we are not handing money back to Europe without having any local advantage. It is important that we ensure that we get as much funding as possible from Europe. It is part of our Programme for Government that we do that. Therefore, we do not want any time delay to have an impact on us.

As for going to the Finance Minister, the Finance Minister has to act within Treasury rules, just as, in the South, they, too, have to operate on the basis of value for money in a business case. Therefore, any proposal has to be able to get through that business appraisal. The original projected figure that we were offered for the scheme was clearly satisfactory, or the then Finance Minister Sammy Wilson would not have approved the business case at that stage. However, a business case on the basis of the new tender figure would not get approval. Therefore, we need to look at what other ways there are of ensuring that we can have a project that gives a value for money outcome and can go forward.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

5. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, in light of the recent calamity surrounding the stalled Welfare Reform Bill, to give an assessment of when the Bill will be back on the Floor of the Assembly and the specific Northern Ireland measures that have been agreed. (AQT 365/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I cannot say exactly when it will come back to the Assembly, because we require cross-party support for legislation that comes forward. I find it a bit frustrating in that it is not actually the Bill that is the issue but the regulations that are attached to the Bill. Perhaps one way forward is for the Bill to go through its early stages and for the Final Stage to be left until the draft regulations are available and people can see their content.

However, the proposals that we have would ensure that Northern Ireland has the best welfare system in the United Kingdom. We have addressed a number of issues. The three, in particular, that were raised in the Assembly and by the Committee have been addressed. Those were effectively matters that dealt with administration, the number of occasions on which payments are made etc.

In addition, I think that it is publicly known that we have attempted to address the issue of the bedroom tax for existing tenants. I suspect that tenants in England, Scotland and Wales would give their right arm for that. It is a significant advance. We have also looked at how, through use of resources, we can help other vulnerable people.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I remind Members that we will start with listed oral questions. I inform Members that questions 3 and 9 have been withdrawn.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development whether his Department will consider bringing forward a scheme or remedial measures to help alleviate the traffic bottleneck on the Bridge Street side of Strabane's old bridge. (AQO 5015/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

My Department has received a number of complaints about traffic progression on Bridge Street, Strabane. Although higher levels of congestion are to be expected at urban locations of that nature, it is acknowledged that the problem is compounded by occurrences of illegal parking on Bridge Street.

Due to the actions of a minority of drivers, I have had to direct my officials to increase the level of parking enforcement on Bridge Street to deter illegal parking, which should help to reduce congestion. In addition, a yellow box junction will be provided on Bridge Street to assist vehicles turning right onto Melvin Road, where legal parking is available. It is expected that that work will be completed within the next four weeks.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his response. Has the Minister had any discussions with the owner of the derelict buildings at the corner of Bridge Street? Will he give any consideration to vesting and demolishing those properties to provide additional parking? That would go a long way towards solving the problem at Bridge Street.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for her supplementary question. Obviously, those are matters that my local officials will want to carry forward if they have not done so. I am happy to provide an update to the Member on any possible progress. However, she indicated that vesting property or land may be involved, and that, of course, can be a lengthy process. I am happy to look at the possible solution that she indicated and will correspond with her on that.

Joe Byrne (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Will the Minister state whether Roads Service is doing anything about improving the image and general condition of the old bridge at Bridge Street?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. The Member will know that there are potential projects in mind for two bridges in Strabane, with the upgrading of one and the construction of a new bridge that will link the bus station to the town centre.

The revised upstream bridge is known as Melvin Bridge, and a scheme that is being carried forward by Strabane District Council, part-funded by the Department for Social Development (DSD), is making progress after delays to the original proposal. Previously, I committed £873,000 to part-fund work on that bridge as one of my Department's active travel pilot projects. Subject to the necessary technical approvals, my Department will adopt the structure and approach footways when the project is successfully delivered.

In relation to the downstream footbridge to link Melmount Road and the bus station to the town centre, I can advise that my officials are continuing to investigate ways of providing a cost-effective river crossing. However, the delivery of a landmark structure would require additional sources of funding on top of potential Roads Service funds.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Minister provide an update on the two pedestrian and cycle bridges in Strabane?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question, which largely concerns the points that I have just addressed to Mr Byrne. As I said, we are actively progressing, to the best of our ability, the scheme at Melvin Bridge, having indicated previous support of £873,000, and we will continue to progress through the necessary stages.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

2. asked the Minister for Regional Development what steps he will take to ensure that rural businesses, particularly those in the agrifood supply sector, will receive adequate support from Roads Service this winter to ensure that their supply routes remain traversable and safe in ice and snow conditions. (AQO 5016/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Roads Service’s winter service programme is based on the well-established practice of targeting the resources available on the busier main through routes, which generally carry in excess of 1,500 vehicles per day. In areas with difficult topography, roads carrying over 1,000 vehicles per day are salted.

In addition, small settlements in rural areas containing 100 dwellings or more have salted links to roads on the main salted network, and priority secondary salting is provided to a number of rural schools that are most affected by the adverse weather conditions. Salting is also undertaken in urgent situations; for example, to provide access for the emergency services, for unforeseen occurrences, such as funerals, or to help get fuel or feed stocks to farmers.

I fully appreciate and understand the concerns of rural businesses, particularly those in the agrifood supply sector. The Member will of course know that it is simply not practicable to salt all roads in rural areas.

Roads Service will continue to use its best endeavours during any severe weather events to help rural communities. However, the primary focus must remain the main through routes, which carry the vast majority of vehicular traffic.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his reply. I know of two rural businesses in the Minister's constituency, which is also my constituency, that employ 300 people and provide the agrifood sector with fresh food daily. Is it acceptable that the 300 employees and the delivery lorries have to travel on ungritted roads every day in the worst of the weather?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I suspect that I know the businesses that he is speaking about. Indeed, I have had contact with local businesses in my constituency, and we should not underestimate the challenge that we face in providing adequate and effective winter services.

These are long-established guidelines that have been agreed, even by this Assembly. Indeed, they were enforced by my predecessors, who include party colleagues of the Member. Nonetheless, I take seriously those issues. I am aware that a number of businesses in my constituency avail themselves of self-help provision with the cooperation of my Department. I encourage that, and where it is possible, we will certainly try to provide assistance.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. Can local farmers and other agricultural contractors still apply to get on the Department for Regional Development (DRD) list for the clearing of roads? If so, how do those people go about getting on that list?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. After the winter weather that we experienced earlier this year just before Easter, a number of additional farmers and local contractors came forward to be registered and processed. The first port of call would be to make contact with the local section office to see how we can assist. There are a number of things that are necessary in order for people to be properly registered. I very much hope, as I said in response to an earlier question, that self-help and help in a community, particularly in the rural areas, can go a long way to ensuring that snow and ice are cleared at the earliest possible times.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

I pay tribute to the people in Roads Service who, in times of inclement weather, carry out outstanding work to ensure that the wider community can stay in contact. Given that snow is forecast, does the Minister agree that many dairy farmers must be wondering how they will get their milk tankers onto main roads and their feeding stuffs in? Does he agree that there is now scope for better integration of those services to ensure that rural communities get the service that, hopefully, will be available?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I entirely understand the Member's point. My Department is already on alert for its winter preparations. My understanding is that a yellow warning has been issued by the Met Office for later this evening and into tomorrow. It is also indicating strong winds or gales for Wednesday, so we are very much into the winter season.

In general, Roads Service will continue to provide the services that it can. We have in the region of 100,000 tons of salt. We have 300 operatives, who are our own staff and, perhaps, agents or contractors, but they make an essential contribution to ensuring as much normality as possible. Some 4,800 salt bins and almost 50,000 grit piles are provided on public roads. It is a major operation. We do not have the resources to salt every road, which, as we heard, is an issue even in my constituency. The resources are not financially unlimited, and we make the best use of them. I thank and want to encourage all the operatives who will undertake this important work on behalf of the entire community in this winter season.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his good thorough answer. I praise those from Roads Service in my patch who have always responded well, particularly over self-help. Will the Minister look at promoting self-help more so that all of us know exactly when and how to respond? Many people do not know that it is there, and we should encourage people to use it.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his acknowledgement of the work undertaken by staff, particularly in his area but also Province-wide. The Member will be aware that, as in previous years, we have again issued the winter services leaflet to every household in Northern Ireland with the best advice available. Northern Ireland Water has done likewise, offering sensible advice as we approach the winter. We will continue to do that. It is also a good thing when we have the assistance of public representatives.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

4. asked the Minister for Regional Development what plans his Department has to upgrade roads that are on the route of the 2014 Giro d’Italia. (AQO 5018/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

My Department is represented on the Northern Ireland local steering group, which is the overseeing committee organising the Giro d’Italia events in Northern Ireland. Officials from Roads Service are involved in the operational aspects of the event through the race committee and have been liaising closely with the race organisers in agreeing the route of the 2014 Giro d’Italia in Northern Ireland.

Based on an inspection, the organisers were very content with the condition of the roads to be used for the three stages taking place in Northern Ireland. Although there are a small number of issues to be addressed by my Department prior to the event, no upgrades were requested. The delivery structure of the event has targeted legacy as a primary objective. Although the Northern Ireland Tourist Board is leading that aspect of the event organisation, my Department will assist wherever possible.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his very detailed response. Does he agree that first impressions are last impressions and that we have an opportunity only to make a first impression? Is he willing to get on his bike and join me in a cycle from Titanic to Stormont over the next number of weeks to see the good, the bad and the ugly status of our roads?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary and for the challenge that he has posed to me. I am not sure who will identify the good, the bad or the ugly, but I am very happy to join him.

The only engineering measure identified is the removal of some road studs — in other words, catseyes — on the approach to the two finishing stages. We are generally very happy with the roads, and the organisers have expressed satisfaction with their condition.

The start of the 2013 Giro d'Italia was held in Naples, as the Member will know. Some parts of the stage routes were in very poor condition, so I have no concerns about the condition of our roads or their suitability to accommodate the 2014 race. It reminds me of the phrase, "See Naples and die." My version is, "See Newry and Mourne." [Laughter.]

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Are there any implications for the legislation on road closures during the Giro d'Italia?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his supplementary. I am not aware of any particular issues presented by that. We are all looking forward to this major international event, its potential impact on showcasing Northern Ireland and the opportunity to continue what I like to think is the cycling revolution, even in Northern Ireland. As a legacy of the Giro d'Italia, I want cycling to be carried forward in a meaningful way that will make it not only a landmark event but a means of encouraging and promoting cycling as we go forward.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

5. asked the Minister for Regional Development for his assessment of the review of the Consumer Council, which was commissioned by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and carried out by Mr Paul Simpson, in so far as it relates to NI Water and public transport. (AQO 5019/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member points out, the review was commissioned by the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. My officials met the independent consultant to provide information on the role of the Consumer Council in its water and transport functions. The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment has launched a three-month public consultation on the future of consumer representation arrangements in Northern Ireland, and I respectfully suggest that anyone who wishes to express their views should do so through that process.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. The Consumer Council can be a very effective link between Departments and consumers. Specifically on water reform, I know that it played a key role in informing consumers. Does the Minister acknowledge that? Given the importance of the Consumer Council to certain remits in his Department and the fact that the proposals are cross-cutting, should any such proposals to change how it is run be taken at Executive level?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary. I acknowledge that there will always be a role for independent scrutiny on behalf of the consumer so that best value can be achieved for the consumer.

On the impact that the Consumer Council has within my responsibilities, the Member will know that the initial Consumer Council water budget was agreed during preparations for the introduction of major water reform and reflected the expectation that there would be three quarters of a million paying customers. Instead, there are fewer than 80,000 non-domestic customers paying direct charges, which means that the number of complaints investigated by the Consumer Council is small. The current budget for the water and sewerage remit for 2013-14 stands at £435,661. I think that there is scope for some savings without undermining any activities of the Consumer Council or any other body.

Since 2010, my Department has also provided in the region of £60,000 per annum to the Consumer Council for work carried out to inform the public transport reform proposals and the implementation of those arrangements.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his answer so far in relation to issues around the Consumer Council. Does he agree that, since devolution, many of the complaints that the Consumer Council dealt with in the past relating to water and transport now come through MLAs' offices, that consultation in relation to transport and water issues very much takes place in the Committee for Regional Development and that there is, in many respects, duplication in much of the work?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member, the Chair of the Regional Development Committee, for his supplementary question and contribution. He raises a very fair and reasonable point as to the changed situation that devolution has brought. An indication of that is that the initial funding in 2007-08 was something like £756,000. This year, it is less than £500,000, and I think that there are still opportunities for further savings on that.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Does the Minister acknowledge the role that the Consumer Council has had in not only representing consumer interests on a range of issues, but in helping the Department on matters such as water, transport and a range of other consumer issues, which input into policy formulation at his Department?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I have already acknowledged that there will always be a role for an independent body to be a champion for the consumer. The fact that a major consultation review is under way into the current Consumer Council is welcome, and I think that people should contribute their views to it. It is time for a healthy debate on the issue, and we will see what outcomes arise from that. I very much agree with the main tenet of his question, which means that there should always be a role for independent scrutiny on behalf of the consumer.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. There has been some criticism of the governance model at NI Water. Has the Department made any progress in carrying out a review of that model?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question; it is nothing to do with the Consumer Council, of course, but I will take it anyway. The Member will, or should, know that the issue was remitted to the Budget review group, as part of the Executive. That is where the discussions on the funding and governance of NI Water issues will be resolved and brought forward. Of course, it is important to say that the Executive, per se, would want to be part of what, I think, would be an important landmark decision for the future governance and financing of Northern Ireland Water. No doubt, his political colleagues around the Executive table and in the Budget review group will want to play their part in that.

Karen McKevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

6. asked the Minister for Regional Development for an update on any flood alleviation schemes his Department is undertaking in the South Down constituency. (AQO 5020/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

My Department's Road Service and NI Water, and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's (DARD) Rivers Agency, provide key infrastructure that contributes to drainage and the alleviation of flood risk in the south Down area and throughout Northern Ireland.

All three bodies carry out the cyclical inspection of sewer, road gully, culvert and designated watercourse infrastructure, taking account of risk and weather conditions. Where necessary, remedial work is carried out to maintain the drainage infrastructure by, for example, removing sewer blockages, cleaning gullies and ensuring that inlet grilles are operating properly.

Work to improve our drainage systems in south Down is currently being progressed at various locations, including St Judes Gardens in Rostrevor and Newry Road sewage pumping station in Warrenpoint. A scheme has recently been completed at Water Street/Horners Lane, Newry, and essential improvements to the sewer infrastructure in Downpatrick are planned that will also help to reduce the risk of flooding in the area. Appraisal studies on potential improvements in other areas are ongoing.

Unfortunately, severe rainfall will always have the potential to overwhelm drainage systems. However, my Department and NI Water, along with the Rivers Agency and other statutory agencies, will continue to work towards reducing the risk of flooding and mitigating its impact on people’s homes and lives.

Karen McKevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer and welcome the flood alleviation schemes that the Department has introduced, particularly those around St Judes in Rostrevor and Newry Street in Warrenpoint, where, I know, work has started. Has the Minister any plans to develop further flood alleviation schemes in south Down in the near future?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for her positive comments on the work that has been done in St Judes, Rostrevor, and Newry Road, Warrenpoint, which I think is close to her advice centre. I am sure that that is not why she asked about it, but anyway. Northern Ireland Water will spend over £5 million on appraisal studies and flood alleviation works in south Down from 2010 to 2015. It would be prohibitively expensive to build the infrastructure necessary to deal with all that our weather can throw at us. However, we need to invest more in our water and sewerage system. Investment in infrastructure is an effective measure to mitigate the impact of flooding, and I am keen to play my part in taking the actions necessary to address the problem. I have sought and will continue to seek additional investment for water and sewerage services through our budgets.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

To widen the issue beyond the confines of south Down into my North Antrim constituency, will the Minister outline what discussions he has had with the Rivers Agency and other agencies around flood alleviation schemes to prevent in particular what happened early in May this year, when we had severe rain and the train line between Ballymoney and Coleraine was closed as a result of flooding?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

It is for Mr Kennedy to decide whether he wishes to answer, because that has widened the question considerably. It is his choice.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Yes, well, I know him quite well. That does not make any difference, of course, but anyway.

The Member will of course know that flooding was the subject of a performance and efficiency delivery unit (PEDU) report commissioned by the Executive after the severe floods that we had in June 2012. PEDU reported back to the Executive, and its report contained many recommendations, including greater cooperation and collaboration between Departments. In the case of my Department, it meant between Roads Service and NI Water and with the Rivers Agency, which is under the competency of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development. I went on record to say and it remains my view that, in line with the PEDU report recommendation, the best way forward is that the Rivers Agency should transfer to a single Department that includes Roads Service and NI Water. Minister O'Neill did not agree with that, and the situation remains unchanged. However, every effort is certainly made in every area. I understand that the area that the Member raised is in his constituency, but I believe that there is good cooperation between the various agencies, whether or not bringing them under one ministerial responsibility would give added benefits. However, we are not quite there yet.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Following on from your previous answer, Minister, can you confirm whether you have had any discussions with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development about bringing the Rivers Agency within your Department's remit?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. As I said, the issue was raised generally during the formation of the PEDU report. Views were very clearly expressed at that point. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development continues to hold the view that she prefers to keep Rivers Agency within her remit. I have a different view, and there the matter continues to sit.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That ends the period for questions for oral answer. We will move to the topical questions that have been listed for the Minister. Questions 3, 6 and 8 have been withdrawn.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development to advise when he is likely to announce the results of his options study for Craigantlet crossroads, or does the ongoing maintenance work mean that an upgrade is unlikely? (AQT 371/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. Indeed, he will know about the work that is planned for the resurfacing scheme at Craigantlet. That work is very welcome, but it is separate from and additional to the issue that he raises about the crossroads. I know that there has been significant interest among public representatives on the issue. The Member will recall the meeting on site some time ago. We received further correspondence from residents in the area. We are reflecting on that, and we hope that, at some stage, most likely early in the new year, there will be a public consultation. There still seems to be a difference of opinion about which option we should choose. We will continue to work at the issue, and we will, hopefully, resolve it.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he give us more information on how he will carry out the proposed consultation on the options? Does he recognise the upgrade of the junction as a priority in his programme? Does he recognise how important it is to local residents, farmers and the North Down commuters?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I assure the Member that, as is normal with public consultations, every opportunity will be given for people, including public representatives, to express their views on the issues. We will certainly provide that opportunity.

The scheme itself will always be subject to available finance. Of course, the Member knows that finance is a very real issue when it comes to upgrading and improving the road network and, indeed, for structural maintenance. It costs something like £130 million to maintain the road structures that we have. Obviously, we seek to make improvements over and beyond that. However, it is a significant challenge. I have no doubt that the Member will want to put in a good word on my behalf to his party colleague the Finance Minister, Simon Hamilton.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

2. asked the Minister for Regional Development what contractual arrangements DRD has in place with the consultants that are carrying out the review of the EU habitats directive in relation to the A5. (AQT 372/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

There has, of course, been significant debate on and responses from me about the A5 over the period. We continue to work to deal with — to remedy, if you like — the issue that the High Court highlighted in its determination. We have continued to work on the preparatory arrangements for the ground works, and we will continue to do that. Preliminary works were carried out on the reinstatement of lands and rectifying works between January and March 2013. They involved erecting fences on the vesting line, geotechnical and archaeological investigations, ecology works and a full range of works. Of course, we had given individual farmers the option of carrying out those works themselves to our satisfaction. I understand that most of those works are now completed, and we continue to work with farmers in the area to work through all the issues.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat agus gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he provide a costing for the retention of consultants on the A5 project?